@doubtingthomas Said 
I wish I could tell you I knew how many other types of cancers are more likly to kill you vs just this one type. I simply don't have that data.
I'm fairly sure there are more types of cancer than there are organs in your body.
My question with this vaccine is. Is it a step in curing overall cancer or just a quick buck marketing cure for one little aspect of a much larger problem. Which is ... cancer.
I'm not saying that this vaccine won't save lifes. I'm just saying look past the small benifit and question the motives of the company creating it. The company that made it, might not be looking to help women and thier ablity to fight cancer. There motive is to make money, thats what a good company does.
I feel there my be two ways to look at this.
You can look at it like this is pollio vaccine and will be a stepping stone to erradicating a threat to humanity. If this is the case. Why does only one company hold the patent?
Or
You can look at this just like 500 other medications on the market that we don't need that are marketed to us 24/7 to cure illness that we don't really need cured.
***** Warning ****** This message may contain Side Effects
(loose stool,projectile vomiting,nosebleeds,errational response posts,negative kudos,dizzyness,sea sickness,shingles,plaque,bad breath,hairarmpits,iching,piles,skin flaking,dandruff,socalism,devorce)
Well the vaccine is provided by the NHS so the NHS's object is to preserve money and wouldn't be spending out for this vaccine unless they thought it would have a dramatic effect.
I'm aware that there are a lot of other cancers out there and perhaps it's different from a female perspective. But if this vaccine can prevent me getting 70% of cervical cancers then why wouldn't I want to go for it?
Oct 11, 2008 @ 05:46:00
btw... she was also on morphine liquid meds as well as pain patches...
I hope you can have something else done.
